Today Dec. 10 has been designated, Human Right Day, by the United Nations. The day commemorates the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948. Yesterday was also the day that the Nobel Committee awarded Chinese pro-democracy activist, Liu Xiaobo, the Nobel Peace Prize in abstentia. Both of these events highlight the continuing struggle to make the provisions of the declaration a reality in countries around the world.
Each year, Human Righs Day has a particular focus for that year. In the past such issues as poverty,torture, discrimination and human right education have been focal issues. This year the focus is on "human rights defenders". As Navi Pillay, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, states :
"We owe the progress we have made to the enormous efforts of hundreds of thousands of largely unsung heroes, known collectively as human rights defenders.Human rights defenders come from all walks of life, ranging from princesses and politicians, to professionals such as journalists, teachers and doctors, to people with little or no formal education. There are no special qualifications. All it takes is commitment, and courage."
"One important set of statistics is missing: we have no idea how many human rights defenders there are, or how many of them are intimidated, harassed, beaten up, jailed or killed each year. We have also failed to develop ways to measure their successes, which are often credited not to them but to the politicians or governments that finally listen to them or give in to their pressure. We need to do a much better job of defending our defenders."
At this specific historical juncture with the vociferous condemnation of the Nobel award by the Chinese government and the attempted prosecution and demonization of Mr. Juliam Assange of Wikileaks, Article 19 of the Universal Declaration seems particularly relevant to the protection of our human rights defenders.
Article 19 states that "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers."
We have high-profile politicians like Mr. Newt Gingrich self-righteously accusing Mr. Assange of fictious crimes :
"Assange has published hundreds of thousands of secret U.S. documents on the Internet. Gingrich told Fox News' Judge Andrew Napolitano that Assange “is an active enemy combatant who is engaged in information warfare against the United States. What he is doing is going to have incalculable damage to this country. It is going to have a number of innocent people killed, a number of our allies killed. It is going to put Americans at risk.... This is an act of war against the United States.”
Mr. Gingrich begins to sound more like the Chinese officials who try to smear Mr.Liu Xiaobo :
"According to Chinese media reports, Liu Xiaobo has been used by western countries as a political tool in order to weaken China and throw the country into chaos. The Nobel Peace Prize was described as an award to Liu for committing treason."
"Liu Xiaobo broke Article 105, a crime of instigating the subversion of state power," Jiang said Thursday. "He went beyond general criticism of the state.
What often is lost in these fevered accusations, is placing the activities of such persons in a human rights context as "human rights defenders" who call attention to and take serious risks to defend those rights that Human Right Day was created to proclaim.
In regards to Mr. Assange and the wikileaks revelations, Amnesty international (AI) provides this context and a thoughtful response to some of the hysteria that is developing around these releases. In a short question & answer format, AI raise the human rights issues involved and helps clarify some other issue in this case.
Some of the significant point that AI makes include :
While government can impose restricions on its employees and can take measures to keep it's communications confidential, it should only restrict freedom of expression to specific and narrowly-applied grounds.This canot constitute "...a blank cheque to keep information secret or to punish individuals for publishing it, simply by declaring the information to be “classified” or declaring it necessary to restrict it as a matter of "national security"..."
Ai has called upon Wikileaks to insure that individuals are not put at risk by being identied as sources in the documents. But this different from the risk of public embarrassment for particular officials.
"...criminal proceedings aimed at punishing a private person for communicating evidence about human rights violations can never be justified. The same is true with respect to information on a wide range of other matters of public interest."
"...governments cannot avoid their obligations to respect the right to freedom of expression by attempting to do indirectly what they would be forbidden from doing directly. Businesses, too, should ensure that their own actions, at minimum, respect human rights."
Once classified information has been released, "...states cannot rely on sweeping claims of national interest to justify coercive measures aimed at preventing further public disclosure or discussion of the information."
The AI response reasserts the human right dimension of "dissident" freedom of expression here in the U.S. as well as in China. We should value the role that these human right defenders are playing for all of us.